|
THE HADITH CONSPIRACY & The Distortion of Islam
By M. Asadi (e-mail: koran114@aol.com)
The Koran and the History of Religion
Humankind were one community, then God sent
prophets as bearers of good news and as warners and revealed
with them the Book with the truth that it [the Book] might
judge between humankind concerning that in which they differed.
And only those to whom the book was given differed concerning
it, after clear proofs had been given them, through mutual
hatred and rivalry&127;(Koran 2:213)
According to the Koran, as has been the case
in the history of all the prophets (Koran 25:30-33), Muslims
have fallen victim to inventions against, the word of God,
the Koran. These inventions have distorted the way that God
sent down via all the prophets. The message that God has been
sending down has been the same all throughout history, same
in every way (Koran42:13). Even though the Koran says in well
over 15 places, that it is explained in detail, Tafseel (Koran
6:114 etc.), and contains a full explanation of whatever is
needed by a believer (Koran 16:89), and should be enough,
Kaafi, for them (Koran 29:51), and contains the complete law
(Shariah) of God (Koran 45:18 and 42:13), as against man-made
law or Shariah (Koran 42:21), "Muslims" insist that
the Koran needs supplements to be understood, and lacks details.
This amounts to disbelieving what God himself says in unequivocal
terms in the Koran.
The Koran and Hadith:
The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's
duty was only to convey (Balagh) the message (Koran 29:18)
contained in the Koran (Koran 69:44) and that the Koran was
the only Wahi (revelation) given to the prophet to be conveyed
to people (Koran 6:19), by testimony of God Himself. Therefore
to follow the words of God in the Koran would be to follow
the messenger. Thus following God is the same as following
the messenger, who only conveyed the Koran (see Koran 4:80)
The inventions against the true words of God, revealed to
the messengers, which is called their true speech (Qawl- Koran
69:40) are the so called "Hadith" (stories about
the sayings and doings of the prophets) as narrated by the
writers of the Old Testament, the Gospels of Jesus (i.e. the
"Hadith" about Jesus), and the various Hadith about
the prophet Muhammed contained in the many "extra-Koranic"
books believed in by the Sunni and Shia schools of thought.
People have attributed these things throughout history to
the messengers, whereas the messengers could never have said
them given the history of the documents and the Criterion
(Furqaan) of the Koran (Koran 2:185)
The Koran states:
"Do they not consider the Koran with
care, If it had been from anyone other than Allah, it would
contain many discrepancies (Koran 4:82)."
Any document that claims to be from God,
but in actuality is not would contain some form of error according
to the Koran. What we see on analysis is that the Hadith attributed
to Muhammed and the Gospels attributed to Jesus fail this
test of authenticity. What we also see is the subjectivity
of the various Muslims groups. They reject the Gospels of
Jesus based on the same test as being corrupt whereas similar
defects found in the books of Hadith are overlooked by them
and they accept them as being authentic sayings of Muhammed.
Let us have a look at the books of Hadith:
Hadith are the various traditions contained in specific books,
believed in by the majority of Muslims to be the sayings of
the prophet Muhammed. These in the major part are extra-Koranic,
i.e. from outside the Koran. They either contradict or add
to the Koran. Muslims sometimes present them as an explanation
of the Koran or as an integral part of Islamic law, even though
the Koran does not confirm them.
A minority among the Muslims does not accept the various books
of Hadith as being an accurate representation of what the
prophet Muhammed said. They take the Koran as Criterion (Furqaan
in Arabic), according to the Koran's own claim (2:185), accepting
only those Hadith [tradition or narration attributed to the
prophet] which the Koran confirms and attests in totality.
I represent that view in this paper. Opposition to the Hadith,
and the whole body of extra-Koranic literature on Islam as
doctrine, has existed from the earliest days of Islam. This
is well documented by Shafi (died 204AH/ 819AD).
The Koran, historically predates any written
Hadith and there is no mention of Hadith or the Sunna of the
Prophet in what we possess as writings before the third century
after the prophet. Koran and rationality based on its principles
formed the basis of religion for first century Muslims (Rahman
1979). Thus contrary to being an innovation, following the
Koran alone is historically the original Islam and hadith
and other extra-Koranic literature is an innovation, introduced
in its written form in the 3rd century after the prophet.
And they scattered not, those who were given
the Book, except AFTER the clear sign came unto them. They
were commanded only to serve God, making the way PURE for
Him alone(Koran 98:1-)
Hadith and the Gospels:
The various books of Hadith that we see in
Muslim society today are the same in relation to Muhammed,
as the gospels are to Jesus. They are both similar in that
both were complied [in what we possess today] centuries after
Muhammed and Jesus respectively [unlike the Koran which was
memorized and written down at the time of its revelation]
and they both present no proof of authenticity [unlike the
Koran in which numerous verses say: In this is a sign [or
proof]&127;", and then asks you to refute it]. Therefore,
objectively speaking both the Hadith and the gospels do not
present any evidence as to be considered a 100% reliable representation
of the words of the prophets, Muhammad and Jesus. Modern scholarship
of both the gospels [the Jesus Seminar] and the Hadith finds
them an unreliable representation of the words of the prophets
or even their close companions.
Fazlur Rahman, who was the Harold H. Swift
Distinguished Service Professor of Islamic Thought at the
University of Chicago wrote in his book Islam (1966) on the
historic study of the Hadith. Summarising I. Goldziher's scientific
study of the Hadith, he writes:
But his argument runs,
since the corpus of the Hadith continued to swell in each
succeeding generation, and since in each generation the material
runs parallel to and reflects various and often contradictory
doctrines of Muslim theological and legal schools, the final
recorded product of the Hadith, which date from the 3rd/ 9th
century [over 250 years after the death of the prophet], must
be regarded as being on the whole unreliable as a source for
the prophets own teaching and conduct (1979:44)
Professor Schacht, who according to Fazlur
Rahman is the first scholar to have undertaken a, "extensive
and systematic comparison of legal traditions in their historical
sequence, is unassailably scientific and sound in method&127;(1979:47-48),
did not believe that the Hadith or the concept of "Sunna
of the Prophet" were part of first century Islam. Shafi
[150-204/767-819] introduced them, at the earliest, nearly
two hundred years after the death of the prophet. The Koran
states exactly the same. The Koran was the only "Hadith"
that was conveyed by the prophet and formed the guidance for
the early Muslim community.
Most Muslims who have taken on themselves the responsibility
of teaching Islam to others have themselves abandoned the
Koran by upholding Hadith. They say without hesitation: "The
majority of Shariah (Law) in Islam is contained outside the
Koran in books of Hadith and fiqh." Such a saying is
a direct attack on the validity of the Koran, which claims
to contain the complete Islamic law from God. We need to ask
ourselves, what kind of submission (Islam) is this when you
are rejecting God's words to follow your traditions.
"...If any do fail to judge by what
Allah(God) has sent down (i.e the Koran), they are unbelievers
(Kaafiroon)." (Koran 5:45).
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent
down, they are tyrants (dhilamoon)." (Koran 5:45)
"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent
down, such are evil-livers (fasikoon)." (Koran 5:47)
The Koran reports that the messenger himself
will complain to God about his so called followers abandoning
the Koran:
"And the messenger says,"O my
Lord, my OWN people have forsaken the Koran." (Koran
25:30)
Muslims, those, who claim also to believe
in the Hadith as being totally true, need to be objective
and not subjective. They should, as concern for truth demands
not change standards while evaluating phenomena. If they reject
the Gospels as being true based on reasons that are valid,
i.e. contradictions, history etc (and they almost all do),
then they should also reject the Hadith on the same criteria.
Hadith have the same problems of authenticity as the gospels
do. Hadith do not represent the words of Muhammed just like
the gospels don't represent the words of Jesus in total.
One would be mistaken in thinking that once
the Gospels were written they constituted the basic Scriptures
of the newly born Christianity and that people referred to
them the same way they referred to the Old Testament. At that
time, the foremost authority was the oral tradition as a vehicle
for Jesus' words and the teachings of the apostles. The first
writings to circulate were Paul's letters and they occupied
a prevalent position long before the Gospels. They were, after
all, written several decades earlier.
It has already been shown that contrary to what certain commentators
are still writing today, before 140 AD there was no witness
to the knowledge that a collection of Gospel writings existed.
It was not until circa 170 AD that the four Gospels acquired
the status of canonic literature (Bucaille 1987).
Both the Hadith and the Gospels are based
on oral traditions that were written down, in the written
form that we have today, centuries after the prophets, Muhammed
and Jesus. In recalling events, a gap of even a year can be
distorted by memory beyond recognition. However, when the
gap is of more than a hundred years, and you're narrating
something to support a point of view [the Ahl-al Kalam and
Mutizila, against the Ahl al Hadith in early Islam or the
Judeo Christians against the Pauline Christians in early Christianity],
your own as against conflicting points of view, the distortions
are immense. Since history shows that eventually the followers
of the Hadith and the followers of Pauline Christianity, politically
dominated the scene both the teachings of Muhammed and Jesus
got distorted. Modern scholarship recognizes this. Except
for the Koran, we have no reliable historical record of the
message that Muhammed conveyed.
John Dominic Crossan, in his book, The Birth
of Christianity (1998), cites a study done after the Challenger
explosion:
The morning after the Challenger explosion,
the 106 students in Psychology 101 [Personality Development]
at Emory University filled out questionnaires on how they
had first heard of the disaster. That established a baseline
for their memories within twenty four hours of the even itself
in January of 1986. Then in October of 1988, the forty-four
of 106 students still at Emory were requestioned (only 25%
remembered the original questionnaire) and their two answers
compared. Finally in March of 1989, follow up interviews were
given to the forty students willing to participate in the
final phase of the experiment&127;When those second versions
were compared with the first ones for accuracy and graded
on a 0-7 scale for major and minor attributes of the event,
the mean was a 2.95 out of a possible 7. Eleven subjects were
wrong about everything and scored 0 (25% of the sample). Twenty
two of them [50% of the sample] scored 2 or less, this means
that if they were right on one major attribute, they were
wrong on both of the others&127; what makes these low
scores interesting is the high degree of confidence that accompanied
many of them (Crossan 1998: 62-63)
The Koran captures the similarity of what
has happened in the case of both Jesus and Muhammed in this
statement:
Has not the time arrived for the believers
that their hearts should engage in the admonishment from God
and the truth that has been revealed to them and that they
should not become like those to whom was given the Book before,
but long ages passed over them and their hearts grew hard..(Koran
57:16)
Hadith believing Muslims make big claims
on the so-called scientific compilation of Hadith. Let it
be clear however, that no matter how scientific you are in
your compilation of what is "false" to start with,
the compilation cannot make it true. Even the criteria that
is presented are un-objective, i.e. the truthfulness of a
particular narrator with a story of how truthful he was. To
repeat, falsehood is not converted to truth by its scientific
compilation.
The scientific method demands that "subjective"
proof i.e. how truthful a person was be ignored and the item
tested on objective criteria. What does the content say?
THE DILEMMA:
Hadith doctors have traditionally evaluated
Hadith on its chain of narrators and its body text, according
to their own criteria of what should be correct. However even
according to their own standards, they fell into a dilemma.
Some Hadith exist which have according to them a "sound"
chain of narrators i.e. it was truthfully narrated but they
dispute the text of the Hadith. One example of this and their
whole system collapses. The Koran gives us the standard for
judging anything that is presented. If the Koran confirms
it in total its true. If the material adds to or contradicts
the Koran, its source is not God or his messenger.
HISTORY OF COMPILATION OF HADITH:
Out of the books that the majority of Muslims
believe in as being authentic, Sahih Bukhari is presented
as being the MOST authentic. However a analysis of the history
of the books shows that it is anything but authentic. Imam
Bokhari the collector of the narration lived in a period over
230 years after the death of the prophet. Out of the 600,000
Hadith (narrations) that he collected, which were initially
attributed to the prophet, he threw out as fabrication 592,700
of them and kept only 7300 as being genuine. They further
reduce to 2762 Hadith after repetition.
The margin of error in these numbers is so great, that any
rational inquirer can see that accepting the book of Bukhari
as containing all authentic Hadith or even a majority of authentic
Hadith is stupidity. Yet the majority of Muslims unquestionable
accept it as "gospel" truth!
There are many scientific and logical errors and contradictions
in the Book of Bukhari, as well as the other books. Some examples:
1.The prophet according to Bukhari in one of the narration
tells his companion Abu- Dharr Ghafari that the sun goes around
the earth, in the apparent description that he gives (Hadith
421, pg. 283, vol. 4 of M.Muhsin Khan's translation of Sahih
Bukhari).
This erroneous view was very popular at the time Bukhari compiled
his collection. However this is absurd, we know today that
the earth rotates around the sun, proven by scientific evidence.
The Koran not only corrected this erroneous notion but also
gave an accurate description of a round earth centuries before
scientists discovered it.
2.According to Hadith no disease is contagious [Adwa]. This
as we all know is inaccurate. What about the common cold and
viruses like Ebola etc. [Hadith 649, page 435, volume7]
3.Books of Hadith contain many home-remedies, according to
ideas prevalent at that time, which are scientifically absurd.
The Hadith mentions there being a cure for every ailment in
black cumin seed [Hadith 591, pg.400, vol 7]. This is evidently
not true. Can it cure cancer or AIDS, not to mention even
the common cold? Hadith suggests that we drink "camel-urine"
to recuperate after an illness [Hadith 590, pg.399, vol.7].
This is disgusting, naturally speaking. Urine is toxic stuff.
The Koran places extreme importance on cleanliness and clean
eating (tayyab). The Hadith mentions that "fever"
is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page
417, vol 7]. Atrocious!
4.The Hadith books insult the prophet by giving him a contradictory
personality. In one instance it mentions that the prophet
ate with a leper and in another it mentions that he refused
to meet with a leper who had come to take allegiance at his
hand and accept Islam. He told the man to leave and accepted
his allegiance in absentia.
5.The famous Hadith about the fly: "If a fly falls into
the vessel of any of you, let him dip all of it (in the vessel)
and then throw it away [and use the material in the vessel],
for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the other
there is a healing [Bukhari, Hadith 673, pg. 452, vol 7]
Beware world, there is going to be an outbreak of typhoid
and cholera if people take the above as "Hadith-truth",
just like "gospel truth" made some people get castrated
just because it reports Jesus saying, "....and there
are some who make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of God."
Beware these myths can harm you!
6.According to Hanbel 6/136, 192,213, the prophet "Never
urinated in a standing position." However Bukhari in
his "authentic" book of Hadith says that the prophet
indeed urinated in a standing position. (Bukhari 4/60-64)
7.According to Bukhari 56/152 and Hanbel 3/107, 163; the prophet
recommended that people drink camel urine to recuperate after
an illness Later on when the same people killed the prophet's
shepherd, he commanded that they be seized, their eyes taken
out and their hands and feet cut and left them thirsty in
the desert. This does not fit in with the personality of the
prophet presented in the Koran. The Koran says that the prophet
was compassionate. How could the prophet recommend the drinking
of camel's urine, considering the importance that the Koran
gives to hygiene?
8.The Koran commands believers not to make any distinction
between any of God's messengers (Koran 2:285 and many other
places), yet according to Bukhari's books of Hadith (Bukhari
97/36), the prophet contradicted the Koran saying that he
was the "most honorable" among all the messengers.
Not only this, the books of Bukhari make the prophet even
contradict himself by saying in a different Hadith (Bukhari
65/4,6 and Hanbel 1/205,242,440) that we should not make any
distinction between the messengers and that he was not better
than even Yunus. Could the prophet have contradicted the Koran?
Could the prophet of Allah have contradicted himself? The
books of Hadith in fact insult the prophet by attributing
to him things he never said or did.
9.According to the books of Hadith, a woman is compared to
a black dog or a monkey (this Hadith pre-dates Darwin but
it refers to women only) Bukhari 8/102 and Hanbel 4/86. The
Koran on the other hand honors women and lifts up their status
contrary to what is contained in the Hadith. A woman is called
bad luck in the haidth (Bukhari 76/53). Also, according to
the collection of Muslim (Sahih Muslim), most of the people
in hell were of the feminine gender! According to Bukhari,
"Women are naturally, morally and religiously defective."
Therefore, according to the standard of the Koran, no Muslim
should accept such prejudiced Hadith as issuing from the lips
of the prophet of God.
10.According to Bukhari (Book of Jihad, 146)
and Abu Dawd 113, the prophet gave permission to warriors
to kill women and children in war. Indeed these people are
attributing tyranny to a prophet held in honor by Allah, and
described as having mercy for the people. The Koran says,
even about the people that attack us first, that we should
quit fighting if they offer peace, leave alone killing women
and children. According to the standard of the Koran, the
prophet could NEVER have asked his warriors to kill women
and children.
11.The Koran describes accurately, the shape of the earth
as being rounded (Koran 39:5), and the cause of night and
day as being the rotation of the earth. The Hadith and similar
writings however contain mythological concepts, which are
then by hook or by crook attributed to the prophet. The most
famous commentary of the Koran, that by Ibn Kathir (2/29 and
50/1) makes extensive use of the Hadith as explaining the
Koran. In that spirit, Ibn Kathir suggests that the earth
is "carried on a giant bull." When the bull shakes
its head, an earthquake results. As stated earlier, Bukhari's
book of Hadith states that the sun revolves around the earth.
12.According to Hanbel 4/85, 5/54, the prophet ordered that
all black dogs be killed because they were devils. Inspired
by that Hadith so called "Muslims" kill hundreds
of dogs all over the world and consider them unclean.
The Koran, on the other hand talks about the sleepers in the
cave (sura 18) as having a dog, inside their dwelling place
and allows meat killed by hunting dogs. There is nothing in
the Koran, which even remotely suggests that dogs are unclean
as pets. Indeed the Koran states that God has subjected animals
to be of use to humankind.
13.The Koran states that," Vision cannot comprehend God,
who comprehends all vision," yet the Hadith of Bukhari
97/24 and 10/129 says that to prove his identity to Muhammed,
God showed the prophet his thigh.
14.The Koran mentions with absolutely no ambiguity that the
punishment of adultery or fornication is 100 lashes (Koran
24:1-3); which is half in the case of slave girls (50 lashes)
and double in the case of the wives of the prophet (200 lashes)
if they were to become guilty. The Hadith, contrary to this
mention "stoning to death," as being the punishment
of adultery in the case of married couples. This is completely
against the commandment of Allah in the Koran, which makes
no distinction between married or unmarried in the case of
adultery.
The Hadith is definitely borrowed from a similar ruling in
the Old Testament. It contradicts the Koran. Could the prophet
have issued a ruling contrary to the ruling of Allah in the
Koran?
There is no verse on stoning adulterers in the Koran. Hadith
forgers knew about this so they inserted another Hadith which
claims that a verse on stoning existed in the Koran but it
was eaten by a goat and so vanished from the earth (Ibn Maja
36/144; Ibn Hanbal 3/61;5/131, 132, 183;6/269). The Hadith
also tells of a "planet of the apes" type story
in which the prophet helped stone a monkey guilty of adultery
whom the other monkeys had caught in order to bring it to
justice. Why do they attribute such fairy tales to the prophet?
Could not God protect his book from the goat? The Koran suggests
halving or doubling the punishment for adultery, how can you
kill someone (stone to death) half or double?
15.The Koran states that God is the protector of true believers,
yet the Hadith states that the prophet was bewitched by a
Jew and for many days, he didn't know what he was doing (Bukhari
59/11, 76/47; Hanbel 6/57 and 4/367). This Hadith goes completely
against the Koran, which counters in many places the claim
of the unbelievers that the prophet was bewitched.
16.The Koran talks of itself as being the only message that
God intended the prophet to convey (Koran 42:52, 14:52;69:44;6:19
etc.). The Hadith of Muslim quotes the prophet as saying (Muslim,
Zuhd 72, Hanbel 3/12,21,39) that no one should write anything
from him other than the Koran. This particular Hadith is in
harmony with the Koran, but then another Hadith contradicts
not only the Koran but this Hadith. The prophet is quoted
as asking, in Hanbel 2/162, Amr bin As, his companion to write
everything he spoke.
17.The Koran states that those who forbid things even though
God has allowed them, are committing a great sin. Yet the
followers of Hadith have forbidden (haraam) the use of silk
and gold by men, even though Allah never forbade these in
the Koran. Contrary to that Allah specifically allows them
(Koran 7:30-32, 42:21;22:23; 35:33). The Hadith in keeping
with its reputation of contradictions, even contradicts this
forbidding law by stating that the prophet allowed a "gold
ring" to be worn by one of his companions and forbade
the others! Could the prophet have invented laws not in the
Koran? Could he then have been partial in implementing those
laws?
18.The Koran only prohibits the meat of one animal, the pig.
Certain sects in Islam however, based on the authority of
the Hadith forbid clams, shrimp, crab etc. Why are they attributing
against God a lie if they are submitters?
19.According to the Koran, division into sects is the work
of evil, and is the result of following man made ideas like
the Hadith (Koran 23:52-56 and 6:159) Division into sects
can never be a mercy as claimed by some schools of thought.
The Koran claims to be the best Hadith (Ahsan ul hadeeth 39:23),
and states that after Allah and his ayat (verses) no other
Hadith is to be followed (Koran 45:6). The Koran also states
that people have fabricated Hadith to mislead from the way
of Allah (Koran 31:6 Lahwal Hadith). The Koran challenges
people to produce a "Hadith" like the Koran (Koran
52:34) if they are truthful. The difference in language, style
and content between the Koran and the other "Hadith"
has been evident and is not denied even by those who believe
in the Hadith as being genuine.
"These are the verses of Allah (God)
which we rehearse to you with truth. Then in what Hadith will
they believe after Allah and His verses? (Koran 45:6)."
The Koran's Verdict:
" And the messenger says of Judgment
Day, "O my Lord! My own people took this Koran as a thing
to be shunned (KORAN 25:30)."
The Koran says in well over 15 places that
it is "explained in detail (6:114 etc)." One word
used is Tafseel which means a detailed explanation. It further
says that it contains a Biyan or clear exposition of everything
(16:89). God says in the Koran that He neglected nothing in
the Book (6:38). The Koran talks about Moses' Book being Tamam
(which means complete), and that the Koran is in no way less
than that. The Koran also suggests that it should be Kaafi
meaning "enough" for guidance by itself (29:51).
The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's
duty was only "to convey the message (29:18)," and
he said nothing on his own as his own sayings (69:44). It
states that the message that the messenger conveyed was the
Koran only (42:52 & 14:52 & 69:44). Therefore, to
follow God's words in the Koran would be to follow the messenger
, (4:80), as the words of the Koran is the messenger's speech
(69:40). It also claims to be the Qawl or the speech of the
messenger (69:40). The Koran claims that it contains answers
to ALL relevant questions (25:33) and contains the best explanation
(Tafseer) of itself (25:33 & 2:159). The Koran claims
to be the Hukm or commandments of God, according to which
humankind is to be judged (5:48). It also states that it is
the Shariah or law/way with which God sent the messenger (45:18
& 42:13).
Who would know best on how to talk to humankind but their
creator? Therefore, it makes no sense to say that outside
sources better explain God's word.
The Koran claims that it is explained fully in detail and
lacks nothing. Therefore it must, according to its claim,
contain a full explanation of everything in Islam, including
Salaah (prayer). It surely does, we just need to study it.
A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get
our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice
at Mecca since the time of Abraham], specifically the "place
of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem)." The Koran tells us that
the purpose of Hajj is to educate Muslims in Islam (Koran
22:27-28) and that the Masjid-el-Haraam is "guidance
for all the worlds (3:96)."
By indexing the verses of the Koran, we can
check all relevant details on the Salaah [the daily prayer].
The Koran confirms and covers every aspect of Islam, more
comprehensively and with no discrepancy compared to the books
of Hadith. The Koran states explicitly that it guides to that
"which is the MOST STRAIGHT PATH (17:9)."
In Koran 2:185 it is stated explicitly that the Koran is the
Criterion (Furqaan). It is the distinguisher between what
is correct and what is wrong. If the Koran is missing details,
as Muslim sects purport, how can it be a criterion or a distinguisher
over those details?
Notes:
The Koran is in detail [6:114; 2:159-160;
10:37; 11:11; 41:1-3; 22:16; 6:38; 12:111; 14:52; 17:89; 75:16-19;
18:54; 20:113; 39:27-28; 54:17; 25:33; 16:89 etc.]
The messenger's duty is only to convey the
Book [5:102; 16:35; 16:82; 24:54; 36:16-17; 14:52 etc.]
The way sent down by God has been uniform
in history in every way [41:43; 42:13; 46:9; 30:30; 6:20;
23:68; 21:24; 4:26; 1:7 read together with 19:58; 6:83-88]
Extra-Koranic Hadith an innovation [6:112;
22:52; 17:73-77; 10:15; 16:116; 42:21; 10:69-70; 5:47-49;
7:28; 33:64-68; 6:123; 6:144; 49:16; 39:23; 45:6; 31:6; 52:33-34;
31:20; 6:116; 2:170; 69:38-49;81:15-19; 51:7-11]
Bibliography:
Koran. Translated from the Arabic
The Bible. Revised Standard Version (1971)
Fazlur Rahman. Islam (1979). University of Chicago Press.
Chicago. Illinois.
Sahih Al Bokhari. English Translation by M. Muhsin Khan.
Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, The Qur'an & Science. 1987.
Seghers. Paris
References to the Koran in this paper
e.g. 39:23 refer to Koran chapter or sura 39, aya or verse
23. References to the various books of Hadith e.g. Bukhari
56/152 refer to the Book of Bukhari, book (chapter) 56, Hadith
number 152.
Copyright © 1997 Muhammed Asadi
|